Tuesday, May 29, 2012

Tense and emotional, confused and distressed, angry and
shocked, these words fail to describe the sentiments of the early morning crowd
gathered outside of N. Enkhbayar’s home on April 13, the day former president of
Mongolia was arrested.

I was at the airport when the first arrest attempts were made,
waiting for my brother to arrive from America. I became curious about the event
as I watched a mob of people gravitate toward a flat screen television hook to the
wall. The television was fixed to a news channel showing live images of police
men holding back a crowd and covering themselves with their riot shields.

Puzzled as to what was going on, I asked my Mongolian friend
whom I had come to the airport with what all the commotion about. She walked
over to the television and stood with the crowd for a moment, read the caption
on the bottom of the screen. She came back a few minutes later to inform me
that the ex-president of Mongolia, Enkhbayar, was being arrested.

After spending nearly a month in jail and going on a hunger
strike in which he lost 16kg, Enkhbayar was released on bail by the Sukhbaatar
district court. Many believe his release was heavily aided heavily by
international pressure, through groups like Amnesty International and the UN,
who cried foul play when the details of the arrest surfaced. With parliamentary
elections soon to take place, an election cycle Enkhbayar plans to participate
in, the arrest and the publicity could not have come a worse time.

There seems to be a trend this year in executive arrests, a
trend that some see as dangerous and others see as necessary. In February,
Maldives issued an arrest warrant for Mohamed Nasheed, a founder of the
Maldivian Democratic Party and former president of Maldives from 2008 to 2012.
A political prisoner during his youth, the reasoning behind this call to be
taken into custody is still unclear.

In March, the Malawi
government arrested Austin Atupele Muluzi, son of former President Bakili Muluzi.
Guinea-Bissau’s interim president Raimundo Pereira was arrested at his home in
April. Also In April, Malian soldiers began arresting allies of ousted
President Amadou Toumani, after a coup which forced him into hiding. While some
of these cases differ from the recent Mongolian situation, common themes and
the possibility of future scenarios are frighteningly clear.

In the United States, the term “executive privilege” is used
to describe the ability for the President and close members of his or her branch
to resist certain types of intrusion from the judicial and legislative branches
of the government. While governmental systems differ around the globe, I will
use this term to define a president or prime minister’s ability to defy arrest.

To be a president is to naturally be the one to take blame
for everything. A citizen lost his or her job? It’s your fault. The economy’s
performance is lackluster? You’d better fix it. Some people feel they don’t
have the same rights as others? Again, your fault. The roads in some faraway
city are deteriorating? You should be fixing this. Foreigners are investing in
your country? How dare they! There’s a drought? It must be because you forgot
to make it rain. The hot water isn’t working? You should have heated the water
yourself. Someone got hit by a car? You should have added more traffic lights.
Someone is overweight? Quit feeding them candy.

The need for executive privilege arises from all these
scenarios. It is easy to blame a president for anything and everything that
went wrong during his or her term. The need for executive privilege is anchored
by the fact that being president is a double-edged sword. Lives are taken into
your hands, peoples livelihoods depend on you, and things you do or say can
affect your country’s economic outlook during your term and for decades after.
This coupled with the fact that the ears of a former president have been filled
with sensitive information regarding a variety of subjects only add to the
argument for executive privilege.

Executive privilege can also be a dangerous thing. There are
many scenarios that have been played out globally in which a president took
advantage of their position. This can cost lives, produce economic turmoil and
create unnecessary wars. Executive privilege creates a situation where bringing
warranted justice to a president is difficult, generating gross circumstances
in regards to accountability. If presidents are not held accountable for
certain types of offenses, then the very foundations of democracy and justice
fracture.

If executive privilege is not administered, problems also
arise for former presidents when the incoming government is that of a political
rival. Regardless of true intent or bona fide evidence, this snag in the
democratic process makes it difficult to bring presidents to justice, whether
they are guilty or not. After all, all current presidents wanting to bring
former presidents to justice should remember that they too will be former
presidents at some point. The sword of supposed justice caters to no man.

With many global news organizations mentioning how
Enkhbayar’s arrest has poked holes in the Mongolian democratic system, the
elections this summer should prove to be interesting. Democracy is always in a
process of experiencing growing pains, as the whim of the people changes daily
and this whim can help or hurt the future prospects of a country. Since a
president is a person, he or she falls too into this category.

Presidents should be held accountable for decisions made
during their time in office; otherwise, nothing will separate a president from
a king besides the term limits. However, due process is a right afforded to all
citizens of a democratic nation, a right that must extend to the president. In
Mongolia’s case, the fact that Enkhbayar was taken into custody in such a
forceful way added international pressure where international pressure wasn’t
needed. This pressure has built over the last month, and is waiting in the
rafters like hungry media dogs for the predicted political explosion this
summer. If Mongolia can learn or modify anything from this recent experience,
it will be to take things lightly this summer. And if power changes hands,
seeking revenge will only exacerbate an already ugly situation. Revenge never
helps anyone in the long run.

Mistakes are constantly made in the democratic process. If
more politicians and citizens recognize and embrace this, changes to the system
are possible and these modifications only enhance the outcome of the system. If
discussions are greeted by anger and resentment, the spiral downward only
hastens the possibility for revenge politics and outward violence. While
executive privilege is a good thing, it must not be used as a shield to shelter
presidents from responsibility and accountability. Democracy is secured by
justice, and once these strings begin to unravel, whatever it was democracy was
protecting us from becomes chillingly apparent.

Sunday, May 20, 2012

Friday, May 18, 2012

The Battle of Khalkhiin Gol

By Cooper Baltis

published Friday May 18th in the UB Post

Oftentimes, in the always dramatic stage of world history,
the smallest acts go on to have the largest impacts.

A seldom mentioned engagement in the Western history classes,
the 1939 Battle of Khalkhiin Gol fought between
Soviet/Mongolian forces and Japanese forces in Eastern Mongolia went on to have
a fundamental impact on the way Japan conducted its World War II campaign.

While the month of May might mark the anniversary of the
nearly three month battle, the conflict started two decades beforehand in the
1910s. As the Tsarist Empire dissolved due to the Communist powers, Japan
briefly occupied pieces of Siberia and a handful of eastern Soviet provinces,
leading to many disputes and petty battles. As Communist powers solidified in
the early 1920s, the Japanese army slowly withdrew from the territories,
tucking their tails between their legs and vowing to return. Regrouped and refueled
by nationalistic imperialism, Japan drew back into the disputed areas in the
1930s, setting up the puppet state of Manchukuo and eventually seizing Shanghai
and Nanking.

With Japan again on its borders, and fearing the possible
repercussions of the Anti-Comintern Pact signed between Germany and Japan, Soviet
Russia began sending financial and military aid to the Chinese. Tensions were
also stirred by the ‘Strike North’ faction in the Japanese military strategy.
Proponents of this faction argued that by cutting the Trans-Siberian lifeline,
Japan could quickly expand into Mongolia and Siberia as well as eastern Soviet
provinces. This buffer zone would then allow Japan to harness the natural
resources of Manchukuo.

Bisected by the Holsten River, the Halhna River (Khalkhiin Gol)
flowed north to south in the eastern Mongolian in the Dornod aimag. The
conflict started when close to 100 Mongolian men entered the disputed territory
in search of a grazing area for their horses. A Japanese cavalry attacked the
Mongolians, driving them back across the Khalkin Gol. Two days later, Mongolian
forces returned seeking vengeance.

By the end of May 1939, Soviet forces commanded by General
Georgy Zhukov and the 6th Japanese army, consisting of 20,000 men,
had moved into the area. A battle was fought from May 28 to 29, eventually
ending in a draw.

As June progressed, skirmishes increased near the village of
Nomonhan, which lead to Japanese General Michitaro Komatsubara getting orders
to use any means necessary to expel the invaders. The Japanese planned on a two
prong attack, but were ultimately unsuccessful as the Mongolian and Soviet
forces were able to prevent the two wings from meeting.

Supply problems arose in July for Soviet and Mongolian
forces as nearest supply base was 748 kilometers away. The supply anguish was
felt by the Japanese, as supply transports from Manchukuo were few and far
between. By the end of July, the battle
had come to a standoff, and rather than risking more causalities, the Japanese
army disengaged from the battle to give time for General Komatsubara to ready a
counteroffensive. While casualties have been disputed on the Japanese side,
deaths in the thousands were officially reported on both sides. Soviets claimed
to have taken 60,000 Japanese lives, while the Japanese army records indicate
this number was closer to 9,000. Mongolian and Soviet forces suffered over
8,000 deaths with 15,000 wounded.

Before General Komatsubara had a chance to attack, a
cease-fire was signed in Moscow, which eventually led to the signing of the
Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact at the end of August. The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was a
non-aggression pact signed between Germany and the Soviet Union, which directly
affected Japan’s expansionistic plans through Central Asia. It also the Soviets
the opportunity to focus solely on one front if need be. By September 1, World
War II had started and Japan had begun its preparations to focus on its
campaign solely on the Pacific.

This change in strategy creates ripples regarding the
historical outcome of World War II. With its South Strike Group policy in
effect, Japan began aggressively pursuing Southeast Asian targets. The results
of the Battle of Khalkhiin Gol also made it geographically impossible for
Germany and Japan to unite their control through the Soviet landmass. It was
also a victory for the Soviet General Zhukov, who would go on to become the
most decorated general in the history of Russia. The Japanese decision to focus
on Southeast Asia created a scenario in which the Soviet Union wasn’t fighting
two fronts, allowing them to focus all their military might on fighting Nazism
in the West. This put pressure on the Nazi regime, as the war on both of
Germany’s borders became hard to handle.

About a nine hour drive from Choisbalsan, Khalkhiin Gol is
now a war memorial site complete with a museum and the ten meter high Yalaltiin
Khoshuu monument. It is a quiet place in the middle of nowhere, behind a border
checkpoint and blanketed by cerulean Mongolian skies. It’s a site that many
argue changed the course of Japanese aggression during World War II, a place
where many men took their final resting ground.